Re: Proposed module: tracker
- From: Jamie McCracken <jamiemcc blueyonder co uk>
- To: Joe Shaw <joeshaw novell com>
- Cc: "Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro" <gjc inescporto pt>, Desktop Devel <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Proposed module: tracker
- Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:26:25 +0000
Joe Shaw wrote:
Hi,
Jamie McCracken wrote:
point 2 is scheduled at nice +19 (same with Ionice +7) so it only uses
more cpu if its idle.
That's not quite how the nice level works, at least in Linux. Higher
nice values get a shorter timeslice, so they merely have less time to
get their work in before other tasks are scheduled. So all processes
fight for the CPU, it's just that (in this case) Tracker gets it less
often.
Also note that the scheduler actually adjusts nice values under the
covers based on how much CPU is being used. Processes with higher CPU
utilization actually have their nice value *lowered*, with the idea that
the CPU utilization is a short-lived thing. So it might be lowered to
nice level +14.
The same thing goes for ionice if it's in the "best effort" IO class.
Only in the "idle" class does IO happen when no other IO happens, but to
set that you need to be root due to potential DoS attacks with priority
inversion.
yeah I know but I dont believe that minor adjustments by the kernel to
nice is causing a slow down as such
My suspicion is high IO Wait states from heavy disk writing (which is
not affected by ionice at all) might be to blame in some circumstances
but I may be wrong
--
Mr Jamie McCracken
http://jamiemcc.livejournal.com/
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]